Gen Z are hungry for authentic and trustworthy stories, says The Independent's Geordie Greig
The Independent has an audience of around 25 million users, 45% of whom are either Gen Z or Millennials, Greig told the show.
'There's also still a hunger for authenticity. It's trust and truth they want,' Greig says.
Greig was speaking to the BBC since The Independent became Britain 's biggest digital news brand.
In November 2024, The Independent's monthly audience (19.6m) overtook The Guardian (19.4m) and remained ahead of Mail Online (18.2m) and The Sun (18.8m), according to Ipsos Iris figures.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
14 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
GB News overtakes BBC for first time to become Britain's most watched TV news channel
GB News has overtaken the BBC for the first time to become Britain's number one TV news channel. New figures show that GB News beat both the Beeb and Sky News in terms of viewing figures during key slots in July. It marks the first time BBC News has been overtaken by GB News for an entire month and comes just after the start-up broadcaster celebrated its fourth birthday. The figures have come from the television industry's BARB ratings, which track total share and average views. They show that GB News pulled in an average audience of 80,600 across each day in July. This compares to BBC News which had 78,700 viewers in the same month and Sky News with 67,000. GB News also came out on top during the breakfast show and primetime weekday evenings from 6pm to 11pm, as well as during the Sunday morning political slot. The Camilla Tominey Show, which runs from 9.30am to 11am on Sundays, secured an average of 123,900 views. This was 21 per cent higher than the equivalent programme on the BCC which had an average of 102,780 viewers. Ben Briscoe, GB News' Head of Programming, commented: 'This is a seismic moment, not just for us, but for British broadcasting. 'We are ending the dominance of the BBC News Channel and Sky News. 'And there's more to come. Starting in September, GB News will expand its programming with the launch of a brand new show from Washington DC, taking our coverage to an even wider audience.' GB News was launched in 2021 and has rapidly grown into a major player in the UK media landscape. It was the first new entrant into the UK's media sector in more than three decades, and has also expanded to become a national radio network. The TV channel's success also comes as increasing numbers of Brits switch from watching live TV to streaming. Figures released by the watchdog Ofcom this week revealed that people are spending four per cent less time watching broadcast TV in 2024 than in 2023. However, GB News's surging viewing figures come amid a series of disputes the channel is locked in with Ofcom. Last year, GB News was handed a £100,000 fine for breaching impartiality rules in a programme featuring Rishi Sunak. It followed an appearance by Mr Sunak on a February 12 broadcast called People's Forum: The Prime Minister, where he was asked questions by a studio audience. An earlier investigation by Ofcom found that 'an appropriately wide range of significant viewpoints was not presented and given due weight'. Meanwhile in February, GB News won a High Court battle against Ofcom after it ruled the channel had breached impartiality rules in a programme presented by Jacob Rees-Mogg. The judge ruled that the initial decisions which were made in May and June 2023 were unlawful. Furthermore in 2023, GB News received 7,300 complaints and launched an internal investigation after former host Laurence Fox made a series of remarks about a female journalist. The actor-turned-activist apologised for a 'demeaning' sexist rant about political correspondent Ms Evans, which included him asking 'who would want to sh*g that?. Fox said he was angry with Ms Evans over comments she made on a BBC debate around male suicide and alleged she had a 'dislike of men in general', but apologised for 'demeaning her'. Addressing the situation in a video posted to X, he said: 'If I was going to be sensible and I could replay it, I would say: 'Any self-respecting man in 2023 would probably be well advised to avoid a woman who possessed that worldview because she would probably cause him nothing but harm'. 'But what I did say was, you know, 'I wouldn't shag that', and all that sort of stuff, which is not right. It's demeaning to her, to Ava, so I'm sorry for demeaning you in that way. 'However angry I am with you still for doing that, and it demeans me because it's not representative of who I am.'
Spectator
7 hours ago
- Spectator
Is David Williams the MoD's fall guy?
Yesterday the Ministry of Defence (MoD) confirmed that its permanent secretary, David Williams, will be stepping down in a matter of weeks. He has served for just over four years, almost exactly the average tenure of his predecessors since the department was created in 1964, but it is difficult to regard the timing as a coincidence. It is still not yet three weeks since the catastrophic loss of data on Afghan nationals and others, and the MoD's use of a super-injunction, were disclosed to parliament by defence secretary John Healey. Williams is not explicitly being sacked: permanent secretaries very rarely are. The Ministry of Defence is being very careful and measured in its language to refer to his impending departure: according to the BBC, Healey had a 'conversation' with Williams before the Afghan data loss story became public knowledge, and 'made clear that this was the right time to make a change'. There is a plausible argument that we should not draw a line directly from the data loss to Williams's departure. The MoD has also briefed that this is 'an appropriate time for a transition' of leadership; under Healey's Defence Reform programme, the senior levels of the Ministry of Defence have been rearranged and streamlined into a 'leadership quad' which will supervise all aspects of defence policy and the armed forces. This is the biggest reorganisation of the MoD for half a century, and it need not be any reflection on Williams that he chooses to step down before implementing the reforms in full, or that the defence secretary would prefer a fresh approach and a new top civil servant. Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton will be taking over as Chief of the Defence Staff next month, while the recruitment for a permanent national armaments director is taking longer than expected. While Madelaine McTernan, Chief of Defence Nuclear, has been in post since 2022, replacing Williams at this stage could make sense. Equally, Williams's departure could be seen as part of a wave of changes at permanent secretary level which often happen in the first year or so of a new government. Simon Case (Cabinet Secretary), Sir Matthew Rycroft (Home Office), Dame Tamara Finkelstein (Defra), Sir Philip Barton (FCDO), Dame Bernadette Kelly (Transport), Sarah Munby (DSIT) and Sir Jim Harra (HMRC) have all left the civil service within the past 12 months. And yet… while the MoD is making no explicit connection between Williams's departure and the data loss, it is hard to escape the feeling that we are being invited to join the dots, and that the permanent secretary is an expiatory offering to the political gods. The whole scandal did, after all, take place on his watch, and he was in charge of the overall management and leadership of the Ministry of Defence, as well as formally being principal accounting officer responsible to parliament. The MoD should under no circumstances be allowed to wipe the slate clean with Williams's departure. There is still a great deal we do not know about the Afghan data loss scandal, though the Intelligence and Security Committee, the House of Commons Defence Committee and the Public Accounts Committee will all be inquiring into the issue. But Williams – whatever his individual culpability – cannot be the fall guy. Even based on what we currently know, the MoD has a shameful inability to prevent the loss of secret data, and data breaches have increased threefold over the past five years. There is also a systemic lack of accountability, particularly in relation to a number of disastrous equipment procurement projects. The readiness with which the department accepted the comfort blanket of a super-injunction for nearly two years speaks to a deeply ingrained culture of secrecy and dislike of scrutiny. The Ministry of Defence is secretive, inefficient, unaccountable and almost pathologically unable to learn from its mistakes. That has been common currency in defence circles for decades, but the Afghan data loss cut through to the consciousness of the wider public. There is now a major issue of public trust, already a rare, valuable but rapidly disappearing commodity. If ministers try to usher Williams off stage, bring in a new permanent secretary and assume that previous disasters can then be written off, they must have their feet held to the fire. This is not a failing individual. This is an ingrained, systemic, cultural malaise. And it has to be fixed.
Leader Live
8 hours ago
- Leader Live
Lammy not accepting Iran's claims over enriched uranium
Representatives from the United Kingdom, Germany and France held talks with Iran last week to try to break the deadlock over the country's nuclear programme. Tehran maintains it is open to diplomacy, though it recently suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). A central concern for western powers was highlighted when the IAEA reported in May that Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% – just below weapons-grade level – had grown to more than 400kg. In a wide-ranging interview with The Guardian, Mr Lammy said: 'Its leaders cannot explain to me – and I've had many conversations with them – why they need 60% enriched uranium. 'If I went to Sellafield or Urenco in Cheshire, they haven't got anything more than 6%. The Iranians claim it's for academic use, but I don't accept that.' Mr Lammy warned that Iran developing nuclear weapons could lead to an escalation of tensions in the Middle East. Israel and the United States carried our strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June. 'Many of your readers will have watched Oppenheimer and seen the fallout of (the US building an atomic bomb),' he said. 'So it's what (a nuclear Iran) might mean in terms of other countries in the neighbourhood who would desire one, too. And we would be very suddenly handing over to our children and grandchildren a world that had many more nuclear weapons in it than it has today.' The Foreign Secretary said he had heard Israeli arguments in favour of regime change in Tehran, but did not believe that was behind the US decision to strike. The Tottenham MP added any decision to topple the government was one for the Iranian people, with his focus 'on what the UK can do to stop Iran becoming a nuclear power'. Last month, Mr Lammy suggested that Britain, France and Germany could 'snap back' on sanctions against Iran unless the country gets 'serious' about stepping back from its nuclear ambitions. He told the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee: 'Iran face even more pressure in the coming weeks because the E3 can snap back on our sanctions, and it's not just our sanctions, it's actually a UN mechanism that would impose dramatic sanctions on Iran across nearly every single front in its economy. 'So they have a choice to make. It's a choice for them to make. 'I'm very clear about the choice they should make, but I'm also clear that the UK has a decision to make that could lead to far greater pain for the Iranian regime unless they get serious about the international desire to see them step back from their nuclear ambitions at this time.'
